On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> Ahh, I think I see it. This is an EXEC_BACKEND build farm animal. >> Theory: After the backend we see had removed the scratch entry and >> before it had restored it, another backend started up and ran >> InitPredicateLocks(), which inserted a new scratch entry without >> interlocking. > > Ouch. Yes, I think you're probably right. It needs to skip that if > IsUnderPostmaster. Seems like there ought to be an Assert(!found) > there, too. And I don't think I entirely like the fact that there's > no assertions about the found/not found cases below, either. > > Will fix, unless you're already on it?
I was going to send a short patch that would test IsUnderPostmaster, but I got lost down a rabbit hole trying to figure out how to make my EXEC_BACKEND builds run on this machine... Please go ahead. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers